Executive Orders Vs Executive Memorandums

The U.S. Constitution affords certain authorities to the Executive Branch of the Federal Government. Although many are specifically spelled out, one that is not, is the use of executive actions, through executive orders and memorandums. These actions have been used for varying reasons by almost every President of the United States. Of late, many of these orders issued by President Obama and President Trump have been viewed as an attempt to bypass the legislative power of Congress. At times, though, these orders are needed to effectively establish a policy, in a timely manner, due to the increased partisanship and grid-lock which Congress faces today.
The U.S Constitution, article 1, section 8, specifies the authority and responsibilities
Constitution specifies the powers and authorities of the President, as the head of the of the Executive Branch, and states that “he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed”. This authority empowers the President, as Todd Gazio wrote, “...has not only the power, but also the responsibility to see that the Constitution and laws are interpreted correctly.” This authority allows the President, through executive actions, to provide direction to federal agencies on how they will implement U.S. laws. Two common actions are executive orders and executive memorandums, which are similar in nature, but executive orders are more formal and are required by law to be published on the Federal Register. Since President Clinton, these two term have generally become interchangeable and have both begun to receive the same level of scrutiny. Regardless of the term that applies, the Executive Branch has continued to use these actions to facilitate temporary changes, when Congress is unable or unwilling to act on legislative
This use of an executive action as an “easy button”, allows the President to bypass the partisanship and delays associated with Congress. The concern with this approach is that it is a short-term solution and can increase animosity between the branches and the political parties. This in turn makes future legislation harder to pass. This was apparent when Speaker of the House Paul Ryan, discussing President Obama’s actions to act solely on gun control, stated that it was an “executive overreach” and that “No president should be able to reverse legislative failure by executive fiat, not even incrementally.” Although true in context, what options have been left when partisanship and personal attacks are prioritized over what is in the best interest of the